Trump’s Gaza Peace Plan Stalls Over Key Disputes as Israel–Hamas Talks Resume in Egypt

As negotiators from Israel and Hamas arrive in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, for the first serious round of indirect peace talks in two years, Donald Trump’s much-hyped 20-point Gaza peace plan is already facing deep divisions. The talks, brokered with the backing of the United States, Egypt, and Qatar, mark the closest both sides have come to a potential deal since the war began — yet the road ahead remains fraught with mistrust and conflicting demands.

A Fragile Framework

Trump’s peace proposal — described by the former U.S. president as a “roadmap to stability and security for both sides” — has been accepted by Israel and partially endorsed by Hamas. The short, few-page document lays out a structured plan for ending hostilities, releasing hostages, disarming militant groups, and setting up a transitional government in Gaza. However, while both sides have expressed cautious optimism, the sticking points could still derail any meaningful progress.

Hostage Release Dispute

Central to the plan is the immediate release of all remaining Israeli hostages within 72 hours of an agreement. Around 48 hostages are still believed to be held in Gaza, with roughly 20 confirmed alive. Trump recently declared that the hostages “could be home very soon,” while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu suggested they might be freed before the Jewish holiday of Sukkot, ending October 13.

Hamas, however, views the hostages as its last major bargaining chip. The group has agreed to the proposed exchange formula only under specific “field conditions.” Given Israel’s recent assassination attempt on Hamas negotiators in Doha, the lack of trust between both sides makes this issue one of the most delicate in the talks.

The Disarmament Challenge

Another major stumbling block is Hamas’s refusal to disarm. Israel has maintained that the war will not end until Hamas is completely dismantled. Netanyahu, standing beside Trump last week, reaffirmed: “Hamas will be disarmed and Gaza will be demilitarized – either the easy way or the hard way.”

Hamas, in its formal response, notably avoided mentioning disarmament, insisting instead that it would only lay down weapons once an independent Palestinian state is recognized. This position remains a direct contradiction to Israel’s red lines, leaving mediators with little room to maneuver.

Who Will Govern Gaza?

Trump’s plan envisions a post-war Gaza led by a temporary technocratic body — supervised by a U.S.-chaired “Board of Peace” that would include figures like former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair. Eventually, governance would transition to the Palestinian Authority (PA).

But Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition is deeply divided on this. Many of his ultranationalist allies oppose any PA involvement, advocating instead for Israeli control and the reconstruction of Jewish settlements in Gaza. Hamas, meanwhile, insists on remaining part of “a unified Palestinian movement” — a phrase widely interpreted as a demand to retain political influence in Gaza, something unacceptable to both Israel and Washington.

The Question of Withdrawal

The issue of Israeli military withdrawal remains another flashpoint. Trump’s proposal outlines a phased withdrawal — first from 45% of Gaza, then 60%, and finally 85% — with the remaining 15% maintained as a “security perimeter” until Gaza is “secure from terror threats.”

The vague language and absence of a clear timeline have frustrated Hamas negotiators, who demand full withdrawal guarantees. Moreover, discrepancies between U.S.-issued maps and Israeli military control zones have caused further confusion.

A Plan on the Brink

For Trump, who has presented himself as the only leader capable of delivering peace to the Middle East, the Sharm El-Sheikh talks are a critical test. Yet, with deep-rooted mistrust, diverging goals, and domestic political pressures on both sides, the plan risks collapsing before implementation even begins.

While diplomats in Cairo describe cautious progress behind closed doors, few are optimistic. As one mediator told reporters, “Both sides want peace on their own terms — and that’s not peace at all.”

Until core issues like disarmament, governance, and withdrawal are resolved, Trump’s “Deal of the Century” may remain another chapter in the long list of failed attempts to bring lasting peace to Gaza.